F 




1 




Class _E"XI^ 



ADMISSION OF OREGON. 
SPEECH 

OF 

HON. ALEXANDER H. STEPHENS, 

OF GEORGIA, 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, FEBRUARY ]2, 1859 



The House liaving under consideration the bill providing 
for the admission of Oregon — 

Mr. STEPHENS, of Georgia, said: 
Mr. Speaker: I do not know that I can say 
anything that will add force to the argument al- 
ready made in behalf of the admission of Oregon. 
It is my purpose, however, to contribute what 
I can to that end. And if I fail in my wish, it 
will be because my ability is not equal to my zeal. 
Apart from considerations of public duty and jus- 
tice to the people claiming tliis admission, there 
is another consideration which enlists my entire 
energies for the bill; that, sir, is the opportunity 
it affords me, as a southern man, and one acting 
with the Democratic party, to show the ground- 
lessness of the charge made last year, that we 
were in favor of putting one rule to a State ap- 
plying with a slave-State constitution, and an- 
other and a more rigorous rule to a free-State ap- 
plication; that we required a larger population 
for the admission of a State not tolerating African 
slavery, than one permitting and allowing it. The 
gentleman from Ohio, [Mr. Stanton,] who has 
just taken his seat, has reasserted that charge, in 
substance. Sir, I repudiated it when it was first 
made, and I repudiate it now. The position of 
Kansas and that of Oregon are totally dissimilar; 
and whatever consideration of duty, looking to 
the peace and quiet of that country, as well as 
the general welfare, may have induced me and 
others, to put the population restriction upon any 
future application from Kansas, like considera- 
tions of duty, of a higher character, acting as we 
now are under existing obligations which we can- 
not ignore, forbid tljat the same representative 
ratio rule should be extended to Oregon. As I 
stated in my opening remarks, under existing 
compacts, under existing laws affirming and ex- 
tending what all regarded as a most solemn com- 
pact, the ordinance of 1787, it is, in my judgment, 
;l high obligation to admit Oregon so soon as she 
has sixty thousand inhabitants. 

Now, sir, before going into that, I wish to re- 
ply to the gentleman from Ohio, [Mr. Stanton,] 
who has just taken his seat. If I understand him, 



and the gentleman from Massachusetts, [Mr 
GoocH,] who asked that significant question of 
the Delegate from Oregon and Senator elect: how 
he would vote in the Senate on the repeal of the 
population clause in the Kansas bill of last ses- 
sion .' both of them would be willing to vote for 
the admission of Oregon, provided that represent- 
ative ratio required of Kansas should be repealed. 
They occupy this strange position: because the 
Democratic party did Kansas at the last session, 
as they assume, a wrong, they will do Oregon a 
like wrong at this session, by way of retaliation. 

Mr. STANTON. The gentleman misunder- 
stands me. 

Mr. STEPHENS, of Georgia. I cannot be in- 
terrupted. I have heard the gentleman's argu- 
ment; so has the House; and the gentleman and 
the House will hear mine. Let them stand to- 
gether. I understand the minority of the Com- 
mittee on Territories, with the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania [Mr. Grow] at their head, signify 
a like willingness. 

Mr. GROW. No, sir; I stated distinctly that 
I would never go for the clause of the constitu- 
tion I have indicated. 

Mr. STEPHENS, of Georgia. Do not inter- 
rupt me. I state the gentleman 's position as it ap- 
pears in his minority report. Tiie only tiling he 
complains of in it is the discrimination, as he calls 
it, in the Kansas conference bill. The only amend- 
ment he proposes to this bill is a repeal of that. 
Not a word in his report against the obnoxious 
clause in the Oregon constitution against negro 
equality. That he passes over, and evidently 
seems to rest his entire opposition to this bill to 
the existing law in reference to Kansas. What 
has brought " this change over the spirit of his 
dream" 1 do not know. I am glad, however, to 
see that there is a number of the other side actu- 
ated by a more liberal, a juster, and a more mag- 
nanimous sentiment. Tliey cannot see the logic, 
or the moral of the position of the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania; that because, in his assumption, 
this side of the House did wrong last session, 
therefore he will do wrong this. To ihe majority 






on that side, acting with the gentleman from Penn- 
sylvania, I would put the question, how can two 
wrongs make a right? If it were granted that in- 
justice was done Kansas, how can that be righted 
by repeating it towards Oregon ? That side of the 
House will permit nic to tell them, that by their 
votes to-day they will spike every gun they 
have fired against the Democratic party for liieir 
alleged injustice done to Kansas. If the Demo- 
cratic party did wrong to Kansas, (but 1 shall 
show that the cases arc totally dissimilar,) the 
Republican party seems disposed to-day to follow 
suit, and do the same wrong they complain of to 
Oregon. If they are sincere in their belief, and 
not governed solely by opposition and antag- 
onism, would it not be the wiser, the better, the 
noliler, and more statesmanlike course for them 
to come forward and set us an example of doing 
right, as the two gentlemen from Massachusetts 
[iVIr. Thayer and Mr. Comins] urged theni yes- 
terday .' 

But, sir, the cases are totally dissimilar; the 
clause iti the Kansas compromise bill, refusing to 
hear any further application for admission from 
her in case of her declining to come into the Union 
under iier then application, with the modifica- 
tion of her land proposition, vi/hich we submitted, 
until she had a population equal to the represent- 
ative ratio, may, or may not have been right, ac- 
cording to the opinions of gentlemen. The pol- 
icy of adopting such a general principle in all 
casi'S where it can be done, may, or may not be 
right, as gentlemen may vary in their o[)inions; 
but that question cannot arise in the case of Ore- 
gon. We are foreclosed on that point, in the 
territorial organic act; and I appeal, not only to 
this side of the House, but to every side, and 
ask how tiiey can get round that obligation in the 
territorial l)ill of Oregon, of 1^48, which declares 
6olemt)ly that all the guarantees, privileges, and 
rights sicurL-d to the people of the Northwest 
Territory, should be extended to the people of 
OiH'gon .' The words of the act are: 

" Sec. 14. ^iirf4c if /io<Acrcn«c<crf, Tliat the inhaliitnnts 
of mill Tciiiinry ^hall Ik; ciiiitied to I'lijoy all ;iiid singular 
tlK- rights, piivilegts, and advantages, uratitud and secured 
ti> lliu |ie()|)le of tin; I erritor>*(>l' Uie L-'nili-d Stales iiniili- 
w<;sl of tile river Dliin by tlie articles iif compact coiitaini'd 
ill till' Didiiiance lor tin: Kovernnient of said Territory, on 
the 13tli day of July, 1787, and sliall he sulject It) all'tlie 
condition^:, restrietinns. and proliiliitioiis, in said arliclcs of 
compact inipo-ed njion ilie people of said Torriioiy." — 
StiiluWs tU Lar^c, volume 9, page '3-2i). 

And what were those rights and privileges guar- 
antied to the peojile in the Northwest Territory 
hereby secured and guarantied to the people of 
Oregon ? Here they are: 

'• And wlionevcr any of ilic said States shall have sixty 
thou-and tri;e inlialdtaiits therein, sucli Stale shall lie uil- 
lililled by its Delcfiates into ilic Congress of the United 
(States on an equal lodtim; with llio ori^'inal Stales, in all 
lespcels wiialsoever ; and shall beat liberty to form a piT- 
nianeiit con>lilnliiin and Stale governmiit': Provided, The 
constitution and goveriiineiil so to be lormed shall lie re- 
publican, and in contormily to tin; principles coniained in 
these articles ; and so far as it can be consistent wilh tlie 
general interests of tlic Confederacy, such admission shall 
beulloivi^d at an earlier period, and vvlien there may he a 
less number of tree inhabitants in the State tiian sixty 
thousand." — /'i/i/i Jlrlicle Ordinance 1787, Statutes at 
Larue, volume 1, page 53. 

No such guarantee as this was ever given to 
the people of the Territory of Kansas; if there 
had been, that representative-ratio feature could 
not liave been put in the conference bill without 



a violation of plighted faith. And is there any 
inconsistency on this side of the House in adopt- 
ing the representative-ratio principle, wherever it 
can be done, and still maintaining good faith 
where previous obligations prevent.' Oregon is 
the only Territory to which this previous obli- 
gation to admit with sixty thousand inhabitants 
applies. Hers must be an exceptional case in 
any general rule that it may be deemed advisable 
to adopt for all the other Territories for the fu- 
ture. Kan.sas stands in a position to take her 
place with all the others, except Oregon, without 
any just cause of complaint. Whether such gen- 
eral rule be wise and proper, is not now the ques- 
tion; nor whether its application to Kansas at the 
last session was right or wrong; the question be- 
fore us at this time, is simply whetiier we will 
discharge an existing obligation .' 

The gentleiTian from Tennessee, [Mr. Zolli- 
coFFER,] who made one of the minority reports, 
argues that the compact of 1787, extended to 
Oregon by act of 1848, was not in the nature of 
an engagement with the people of a Territory, but 
with a State. The language, he says, is, " whcn- 
everany of said Slates, "&c. Mr. S[)eaker, what 
makes a State.' Is it boundary.' is it limits.' is 
it rivers? is it parallels of latitude? Sir, people 
make States. His argument, to my mind, has 
no force. The Territory was defined, and the 
compact entered into with the people, with the 
inhabitants; and that compact was, that as soon 
as they had sixty thousand free inhabitants, they 
were to be entitled to admission as a State; and 
further, so far as it can be consistent with the 
general interest, such admission sliall be allowed 
with a less number than sixty thousand inhabit- 
ants. There is no escape from this; nor are we 
without some lights as to a proper construction 
of these words. It is the same identical guar- 
antee that was extended to Tennessee in 1790; 
and how was this language interpreted by those 
who made the compact? How was it construed 
by the great lights of the old Republican party? 
This identical question came up on the admission 
of Tennessee, the gentleman's own State. 

The debate on that question was referred to 
yesterday. There is no dodging the question — 
no evading it. The question here, so far as pop- 
ulation is concerned, is the same as that on the 
admission of Tennessee. The only fact in issue 
now before us, is the fact that was in issue 
then. It is not whether the proposed State has 
ninety thousand or one hundred thousand, but 
siin|jly whether it has sixty thousand inhabit- 
ants. I will not go over the argument to show 
that it has, I am satisfied that' there are over 
sixty thousand inhabitants in Oregon. I am well 
.satisfied, from the evidence I cited the other 
day, that there are over one hundred thousand. 
There were forty-three thousand and upwards in 
1855, as shown by an im|5erfecl census. F'ive 
years before there were only ten thousand. In five 
years they had increased four-fold. With a pro- 
portionate increase there would be now one liun- 
dred and thirty thousand and upwards. But even 
suppose the increase has been partially retarded: 
the other evidence shows there rnust be over 
one hundred thousand. The official report shows 
personal properly to the amount of §22,000,000. 
Suppose the people of Oregon to be worth $200 
per capita of personal property — which is more 



than any Stale in the Union: there would be one 
hundred and ten thousand inhabitants. I tliink 
the per cnpita estimate of personal property at 
$200 is too high for Oregon. In Georgia, where 
the wealth per capita is greater, as I showed the 
other day, than in any other State in the Union, 
it is, including real and personal estate together, 
$534 for the entire population. The average in 
the United States is something over $350. Place 
it at §15" in Oregon for personal property alone, 
(for tiiey own no real estate there — no land pat- 
ents have yet issued) and the population will be 
over one hundred and thirty thousand. These 
facts satisfy me that there are more than one hun- 
dred thousand people there. No man can doubt, 
it seems to me, that there are over sixty thou- 
sand; and that is the question. 

Then, sir, in the debate referred to on the ad- 
mission of Tennessee, what said Mr. Madison 
on that point.' 

" The fact of population was the only necessary one ; 
and would geiitleiiieii be satisfied with no other method of 
ascertaining it but such as they themselves should direct."' 

He went on: 

" If there were the stipulatednuinber of inhabitants, that 
Territory could not be denied its claim of becoming a»State 
of the Union without a violation of rights." 

Again, he says that — 

" He himself has no doubt on the subject; the evidence 
was sulTicient and satisfactory." 

And again he said: 

" But he thought, where there was a doubt, Congress 
ougin to lean towards a decision which would give equal 
rights to every part of tlie American people." 

He said there was no doubt on his mind that 
there were sixty thousand people there; and that, 
under the compact, they were bound, from all 
the facts he could gather, to admit the State. 

How can gentlemen escape that.' Mr. Macon, 
a gentleman who occupied a high position in the 
Republican party of that day — not the party of 
modern Republicans, but of good old Republicans 
of the Jeffcrsnnian school — one of the shining 
lights of the House, whose name will go down 
to history and live as long as the names of the 
founders of the Republic, said: 

"The question before the committee was on admitting 
the Territory to be a State in the Union. There appeared 
to him only two things as necessary to be inquired into. 
First, was the new government republican .' It appeared to 
him to be so. Second, were there sixty thousand inhabit- 
ants in the Territory.' It appeared to him there were ; and 
if so, their admission as a State should not be considered as 
a gift, but as a right." 

Again, Mr. Gallatin said he — 

" Was of opinion that the people of the southwestern ter- 
ritory became ipso facto a State the moment they amounted 
to sixty thousand I'ree inhabitants; and that it became the 
duty of Congress, as part of the original compact, to recog- 
nize them as such, and to admit them into the Union, when- 
ever they had satisfactory proof of the fact." 

I cannot dwell on this branch of the subject. It 
is no question of ninety-three thousand here. It 
is no question of what is the ratio in other Terri- 
tories. It is no questfon of Kansas discrimina- 
tion. It is the simple, naked question of fulfill- 
ing obligations. That is the whole of it. I have 
no doubt that she has sixty thousand; and every 
man upon this floor so believing, according to 
this authority, is bound to vote for her admis- 
sion. Will you do it.' 

But the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Stanton] 
complains of the constitution of Oregon. He 



complains of that article which denies political 
equality to the African race; to that part which ex- 
cludes negroes from voting; which prevents them 
from exercising the rights of citizenship; espe- 
cially that which denies them the right to main- 
tain an action in their courts. The Topeka con- 
stitution of Kansas, which that gentleman favored 
in 1856, excluded free negroes entirely from the 
Territory of Kansas. 

Mr. GROW. I will correct the gentleman. 
The Topeka constitution did not exclude free 
negroes from Kansas; but the question was sub- 
rnitted to the people, as instructions to the Legis- 
lature, to pass an act of that character. 

Mr. STEPHENS, of Georgia. And a large 
majority of the gentleman's friends who adopted 
the constitution voted to give the instructions. 

Mr. GPtOW. I make no point upon that. 

Mr. STEPHENS, of Georgia. And those who 
profess to be the exclusive friends of negroes, as 
they now do, so far as that constitution was con- 
cerned, voted to banish them forever from the 
Slate, just as Oregon has done. Whether this 
banishment be right or wrong, it is no worse ia 
Oregon than it was in Kansas. But, on the score 
of humanity, we of the South do not believe that 
those who, in Kansas or Oregon, banish this race 
from their limits, are better friends of the negro 
than we are, who assign them Uiat place among 
us to which by nature they are filled, and in which 
they add so much more to their own happiness 
and comfort, besides to the comrnon well-being 
of all. We give them a reception. We give them 
shelter. We clothe them. We feed them. We 
provide for their every want, in health and in sick- 
ness, in infancy and old age. We teach them to 
work. We educate them in the arts of civiliza- 
tion and the virtues of Christianity, much more 
effectually and successfully than you can ever do 
on the coasts of Africa. And, without any cost 
to the public, we render them useful to themselves 
and to the world. The first lesson in civilization 
and Christianity to be taught to the barbarous 
tribes, wherever to be found, is the first great 
curse against the human family — that in the sweat 
of their face they shall eat their bread. Under our 
system, our tuition, our guardianship and foster- 
ing care, these people, exciting so much mis-" 
placed philanthropy, have attained a higher de- 
gree of civilization than their race has attained 
anywhere else upon the face of the earth. The 
Topeka people excluded them; they, like the 
neighbors we read of, went round them; we, Hke 
the good Samaritans, shun not tiieir destitution 
or degradation — we alleviate both. But let that 
go. 

Oregon has, in this matter, done no worse than 
the gentlenian's friends did in Kansas. 1 think 
she acted unwisely in it — that is her business, not 
mine. But the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Stan- 
ton] questions me, how could a negro in Oregon 
ever get his freedom under the constitution they 
have adopted.' I tell him, under their constitution 
a slave cannot exist there. The fundamental law 
is against it. Bui, he asks, how could his free- 
dom ever be established, as no free person of color 
can sue in her courts .' Neither can they in Geor- 
gia; still our courts are open to this class of peo- 
ple, who appear by prochein ami or guardian. 
Nor is there any great hardship in this; for mar- 
ried women cannot sue in their own names any- 



where where the comr^ioii law prevails. Minors 
also have to sue by guardian or next friend. We 
have suits continually in our tribunals by persons 
claiming to be free persons of color. They can- 
not sue in their own names, but by next friend. 
They are not citizens; we do not recognize them 
as such; but still the courts are open; and just 
so will they be in Oregon, if the question is ever 
raised. 

Mr. REAGAN. By the laws of Texas free 
negroes are prohibited from residing in that State, 
and hence Iiavc no riglit to sue in her courts; and 
yet the courts there have entertained jurisdiction 
of suits for the liberation of free negroes, and I 
have assisted in the prosecution of such suits, in 
wiiich they were declared free under writs of 
habeas corpus. 

Mr. STEPHENS, of Georgia. I understand 
the gentleman to .say that the constitution of Texas 
is similar to this, and yet that her courts are 
opened just as I stated in reference to Georgia; 
and that ho himself has assisted free negroes in 
the courts of Texas to obtain their riglits. There 
can be no difficulty upon that score. Let me say 
to gentlemen on the other side of the House, not 
to lay tlie flattering unction to their souls that 
they can escape by such a pretext as that. 

But it was intimated by the gentleman from 
Ohio, that last year we voted to admit Kansas as 
a slave State with a view of getting two Demo- 
cratic Senators, and that our object is the same 
now in regard to Oregon. Sir, in this he is mis- 
taken. We stood then, as now, upon principle. 
Had Kansas been admitted under tlie Lecomjiton 
constitution, all of us Icnew tiiat the probabilities 
were, that two Republican Senators would have 
been elected. Nor was the large Democratic vote 
in the Senate, soon after, upon this bill for the ad- 
mission of Oregon, based upon any such idea as 
he intimated. It could not have been. When 
this bill passed the Senate it was not known what 
sort of Senators would be elected there, any more 
than it was as to Kansas. The election in Oregon 
had not been heard from. It was a hot contest. 
And at the election which afterwards came off, 
the member who was returned to this [louse was 
elected by only sixteen hundred majority. 

Under these circumstances, how can the gen- 
tleman attribute such motives to the action of 
Democratic Senators.' Where is the slightest 
evidence for such an imputation .' May be the 
gentleman attributes to oth(u-s the motives by 
which he himself is governed — that is, a wish to 
bring in the State under political auspii-es favor- 
able to his own view of public policy. May be he 
thinks, by rejecting this constitution, the State 
may come in under a Republican insiead of a 
Democratic banner; for he said her admission was 
only a question of time. I will not say that this i.s 
his object in 0])[)osing this bill; but I do say, for 
myself, that I am governed by no such motives as 
he has iiuimated. 1 will vote, whenever a Slate 
comes here with a constitution republican in form, 
and with an obligation resting upon me to vote for 
her admission, as this does, for her admission, 
irrespective of what may be the poliiical cast of 
her Senators and members elect. I will never do 
wrong that right may afterwards como from it. 
Wioiig does not produce such fruits. What you 
plant and sow, that you reap. I will never com- 
mit an acknowledged error, hoping that good will 



come of it. Good ends never justify wrong means 
according to my code of morals. Honesty is the 
best policy in all things. Perhaps most of those 
on the other side of the House who go against 
this bill, do so barely to be in opposition. To 
such I would say what I once said to a gentle- 
man in my district. When I was going to ad- 
dress the people at a particular place, meeting 
him on the way, I asked him if he was soing up 
to the court-house.' He said, no; that I was go- 
ing to speak, and that he only wanted to know 
what side I was upon to be against it. I said "that 
is the reason you are always in the minority; 
you give me choice of sides upon all questions, 
and ofcoursel take the best." [Laughter.] Would 
it not be well for gentlemen on that side to con- 
sider the point, barely as a matter of political or 
party tactics.' That gentleman was so well pleased 
with the remark that he went and heard me on 
the occasion alluded to, and from that day to this 
has never failed to vote for me. If the opposite 
side will allow me, I will say to them it is bad 
policy in any party to oppose everything barely 
for opposition sake. Let me entreat them not to 
oppose this bill — as some of them do, I fear — 
barely because Democrats vote for it. By this 
course, you give us choice of sides in a great 
issue of right. 

One word further, upon another subject, and I 
call the especial attention of the House to it. It is 
the objection raised to the constitution of Oregon 
on accountof tlie alien suffrage feature in it. The 
gentleman from Tennessee, [Mr. Zollicoffer,] 
in his report, quotes a part of the decision of the 
Supreme Court, bearing upon the constitutional 
power of a State so to regulate suffrage within he^- 
own limits, but stofis right in the middle of a sen- 
tence. I will read first the extract quoted by the 
gentleman — italics his — and then read the whole 
sentence, as it stands in Chief Justice Taney 's 
decision in the Dred Scott case: 

''The CoiKstitiuion lias conferred on Congress llio right 
to cst;il)li:;|i a unironn rale of natnraliz^tion, anil tliis right 
is cvidi'iitly exclusive, ami has always been held by this 
court to hi^ po. Consequently, no State, since Ilie adoption 
of tlio Constitution, can, by naturalizing an alien, invest 
him with the ri^lits and ■privileges accural lo a citizcii of a 
Slate under Ihc Federal Government,^' Sic. 

There the gentleman stops, with th.c sentence 
unfinished, at a comma. The Chief Justice goes 
right on with these words — 

'• altliongli, so far as the State alono was concerned, he 
would undoubtedly be entitled to I lie lights of a cilizcn.and 
clothrd with all the lights and iniiniinilics which th(! con- 
stilution and laws of the State attached lo that charac- 
ter." 

In this the Supreme Court says, and says truly, 
that no State can make an alien by birth a citizen 
of the United States — that is the exclusive right 
of Congress; but that each State may clothe an 
alien with all the privileges and rights they see 
fit, within their own jurisdiction and limits. The 
right of suffrage, the right lo declare who shall 
vote at elections, is expressly reserved in the Con- 
stitution of the United States to each State. This 
Government cannot interfere with that power. It 
is the last right I would have the States to sur- 
render; for upon it rest all the great bulwarks 
of State rights;and, should itever be surrendered, 
no vestige of State riijlits would remain. 

Mr. ZOLLICOFFER. The comments of the 
gentleman from Georgia upon that portion of my 



report would produce the impression that I have 
acted unfairly. 

Mr. STEPHENS, of Georgia. I do not say 
that. I cannot, however, be interrupted. I have 
barely time sufficient 

Mr. ZOLLICOFFER. But let me make this 
statement. I will not be two minutes. 

Mr. STEPHENS, of Georgia. Be brief. I 
will give you two minutes, but no more. 

Mr. ZOLLICOFFER. 1 was enforcing the 
position, as asserted by the court, that a State 
could not confer upon unnaturalized foreigners the 
rights of citizenship, so far as the Federal Gov- 
ernment was concerned; and, therefore, I quoted 
only that portion of the sentence found in the de- 
cision, which showed that to be the position of 
the court. That portion of the sentence is this. 

Mr. STEPHENS, of Georgia. I cannot yield 
any further. I have already read it. 

Mr. ZOLLICOFFER. Let me add the single 
remark that, in my report, I distinctly concurred 
with the court in the remaining portion of that 
sentence; that, so far as " the State alone was con- 
cerned," the State had the right to confer rights 
of citizenship upon unnaturalized foreigners. 

Mr. STEPHENS, of Georgia. It would have 
been much belter understood, if the gentleman 
had quoted the whole of it, and given his concur- 
rence in the whole as it stands. And I must be 
permitted to say, that in concurring in the whole 
of that decision as it stands, he yields the whole 
question. If a State has the right to confer upon 
aliens all the rights of its own citizens, so far as 
she is concerned, certainly the right of suffrage 
is included. 

Mr. ZOLLICOFFER. That is, so far as the 
State alone is concerned. 

Mr. STEPHENS, of Georgia. Exactly. The 
State has the exclusive control of the right of suf- 
frage within her limits and under her laws, ac- 
cording to the decision of the Supreme Court. 
She can say who may vole for all her officers; who 
for Governor and who for her State Senate and 
who for her House of Representatives; and then 
the Constitution of the United States expressly 
provides that the members of this House shall be 
chosen or voted for by those in each State who, 
by the constitution and laws of each State, are 
entitled to vote for the most numerous branch of 
the State Legislature. In admitting that each State 
may yllow an alien to vote for members of the 
most numerous branch of their own Legislature, 
the gentleman yields this entire question. The 
language in Chief Justice Taney's decision imme- 
diately preceding that quoted by the gentleman 
in his report, is in these words: 

" Nor have tlie several Statps surrendered the power of 
conferring these riglits and privileges, by adopting the Con- 
stitiitioti of the United States. Each Slate may still confer 
them upon an alien, or any one it thinks proper, or upon 
any class or description of persons ; yet he would not be a 
citizen in the sense in which that word is used in iheCon- 
stituiion of the United States, nor entitled to sue as such, 
in one of its courts, nor to the privileges and immunities of 
a citizen in the other States. The rights which he would 
acquire wouhl be restricted to the State which gave them." 

Then comes the gentleman's quotation. And 
from the whole, the principle is clear, that each 
State may, if she chooses, confer tiic right of cit- 
izenship within her own limits and jurisdiction, 
upon an alien. But, without naturalization under 
the laws of the United States, this will not give 
him the right of citizenship in any respect out- 



side of that State. In it, his rights of citizenship 
may be as full and complete as those of the native 
born. 

But I did not intend to argue this point. I did 
that at the last session, on the Minnesota bill. In 
that argument, I gave the history of this question 
of alien suffrage in the Territories. I have nothing 
to add to what I then said. I barely refer to it 
now, that it may be considered as part and parcel 
of what I would say on the same points, if my 
time allowed, to-day. Of the Presidents Vi^ho, in 
some form or shape, had given the principle their 
sanction, either in the Territories or States, on 
their admission, I named Washington, the elder 
Adams, Jefferso.n, Madison, Jackson, Polk, Fill- 
more, and Pierce; and to this list may now be 
added that of Buchanan, who signed the Minne- 
sota bill. 

My colleague [Mr. Hill] yesterday alluded 
to what Mr. Calhoun said on the subject in 1836. 
I commented upon that, last year. I cnuld not 
find that speech of Mr. Calhoun in the Globe, or 
any parliamentary record in the country. I do 
not mean to say that he did not make it. It was 
not made upon the admission of Michigan. It 
was made, if at all, when a measure was up in- 
volving the question of suffrage in the Territory, 
while Micliigan was still in a territorial condi- 
tion. The speech is said to have been made in 
1836. Michigan was not admitted until 1837. 
Her constitution was similar in this respect to 
that of Oregon. Mr. Calhoun was then in the 
Senate; he did not raise his voice against that fea- 
ture in it, as far as I have been able to find. Not 
a word fell from him, at that time, on the sub- 
ject of alien suffrage, that I am aware of. 

Mr. ZOLLICOFFER. Allow me one sentence, 

Mr. STEPHENS, of Georgia. I cannot yield. 

Mr. ZOLLICOFFER. Allow me but a single 
sentence: that sentence is, that I should labor 
under great disadvantage, if the gentleman were 
even disposed to extend to me the courtesy of al- 
lowing me to reply to his points while he holds 
the floor. Therefore, I will not at present ask to 
do so. 

Mr. STEPHENS, of Georgia. That I under- 
stand very well. The gentleman can reply here- 
after. My time will not allow me to indulge him 
now. I made the speech I have referred to last 
year, expecting that it would be replied to; but 
It remains yet without reply. And 1 cannot per- 
mit my time to-day to be taken up with matters 
there disposed of. 

Mr. HILL. Let me ask my colleague a ques- 
tion. Is he not aware of the votes given by Mr. 
Calhoun, on the Michigan bill, against permitting 
alien suffrage in that State .' It was on the mo- 
tion of Mr. Clay. 

Mr. STEPHENS, of Georgia. What year ? 

Mr. HILL. In 1836. 

Mr. STEPHENS, of Georgia. Yes; I know 
of his votes alluded to in 1836. Michigan was 
then a Territory. I repeat again, that on the ad- 
mission of Michigan as a State next year, Mr. 
Calhoun said nothing against the alien-suffrage 
feature in her State constitution, that I know of. 
He may still have been against it. 

But one word further in reply to my colleague 
as to Mr. Calhoun's position on this subject: 
Whatever he may have said on it, or however he 
may have voted on it in 1836, yet in 1848, he was 



6 



on thecommiitee that reported the celebrated Clay- 
ton comprninisp, wliicli provided af^overnment for 
this very Territory of Ocegoii, and tiiat bill con- 
tained this very alien suffrage clause in it. Mr. 
Calhoun voted for the bill with this clause in it in 
the Senate. I iiave the record by me. It is not 
of so much importance what he said or how he 
voted in 18.3G, when the question was first started, 
as how he voted twelve years afterwards, and 
after mature investigation. Here is his vote in 
1848. I put that against his speech and his vote 
in 1836, and let all go to the country with my col- 
league's comments. I shall bo content. 

Now, Mr. Speaker, on anotht-r and entirely 
different aspect of this questicm, I have something 
special to say to another side of the House — a 
distinct class in it. I mean the members coming 
from siaveholding States. There is evidently a 
feeling of opposition in that quarter to the admis- 
sion of Oregon, from a reluctance and manifest 
indisposition to increase tlic number of what are 
called free States. Tliis arises from an appre- 
hension that, with the loss of the balance of power, 
the righls of our section upon constitutional ques- 
tions will be less secure. This may be so. it 
does not, however, necessarily follow. But that 
balance is already gone — lost by causes beyond 
your or my control. There is no prospect of its 
ever being regained; aTid, in taking that ground, 
you do but reverse the jiosition of our sectional 
opponents on the otherside of the House. I know 
it is the tendency of power to encroach; but let 
us look to the security which rests upon pi-in- 
ciplc, rather than upon numbers. The citadel of 
our defense is principle sustained by reason, 
truth, honor, and justice. Let us, therefore, do 
justice, though the heavens fall. 

Let us not do an indirect wrong, for fear that 
the recipient from our hands of what is properly 
due will turn upon us and injure us. Statesmen 
in the line of duty should never consult their fears. 
Where duty leads, there we may neVfer fear to 
tread. In the political world, great events and 
changes are rajiidly crowding upon us. To these 
we should not be insensible. As wise men, we 
should not attempt to ignore them. We need 
not close our eyes, and suppose the sun will cease 
to shine because we see not the light. Let us 
rather, with eyes and minds wide awake, look 
around us and see where we are, wlience we have 
come, and where we shall soon be, borne along 
by the rapid, swift, and irresistible car of time. 
This immense territory to the west has to be peo- 
pled. It is now peopling. New States are fast 
growing up; and others, not yet in embryo, will 
soon spring into existence. Progress and devel- 
opment' mark everything in nature — human so- 
cieties, as well as everything else. Nothing in the 
physical world is still; life and motion are in every- 
thing: so in the mental, moral, and political. The 
earth is never still. The great central orb is ever 
moving. Progress is the universal law governing 
all things — animate as well as inanimate. Death 
itself is but the beginning of a new life in a new 
form. Our Government and institutions are sub- 
ject to this all-[)ervading power. The past won- 
derfully exemplifies its influence, and gives ua 
some shadows of the future. 

This is the sixteenth session that I have been 
here, and within that brief space of fifteen years, 
we have added six States to the Union — lacking 



but one of being more than half of the original 
thirteen. Upwards of twelve hundred thousand 
square miles of territory — a much larger area than 
was possessed by the whole United States at the 
time of the treaty of peace in 1783 — have been 
added to our domain. A\ this time the area ofour 
Republic is greater than that of any fivi> of the 
greatest Powers in Europe all combinetl; greater 
than that of the Roman Empire in the brightest 
days of her glory; more extensive than were 
Alexander's dominions when he stood on the 
Indus, and wept that he had no more worlds to 
conquer. Such is our present position; norare 
we yet at the end ofour acquisitions. 

Our internal movements, within the same time, 
have not been less active in progress and develop- 
ment than those external. A bare glance at these 
will sufl^ce. Our tonnage, when 1 first came to 
Congress, was but a little over two million; now 
it is upwards of five million, more than double. 
Our exports of domestic manufactures were only 
eleven million dollars in round numbers; now 
they are upwards of thirty million. Our export.? 
of domestic produce, staples, &c., were then un- 
der one hundred million dollars; now the}'' are 
upwards of threi: hundred million! The amount 
of coin in the United States, was at that time 
about one hundred million; now it exceeds three 
hundred million. The cotton crop then was but 
fifty-four million; now it is upwards of one hun- 
dred and si.xty million dollais. We had then 
not more than five tliousand miles of railroad in 
operation; we have now not less than twenty-six 
thousand miles — more than enough to encircle the 
globe — and at a cost of more than one thousand 
million dollars. At that time, Professor Morse 
was engaged in one of the rooms of this Capitol 
in cxperimeniing on his unperfectcd idea of an 
electric telegraph — and there was as much doubt 
about his success, as there is at present about the 
Atlantic cable — but now there are more than 
thirty-five thousand miles in extent of tiiese iron 
nerves sent forth in every direction through the 
land, connecting the most distant points, and 
uniting all together as if under the influence of a 
common living sensorium. This is but a glance 
at the surface; to enter within and take the range 
of other matters — schools, colleges, the arts, and 
various mechanicaland industrial pursuits, which 
add to the intelligence, wealth, and jirospcrity of 
a people, and mark their course in the history of 
nations, would require time; but in all would be 
found alike astonishing results. 

This progress, sir, is not to be arrested. It will 
go on. Tlie end is not yet. There are persons 
now living who will see over a hundred million 
human beings within the present boundaries of 
the United States, to say nothing of fuiure exten- 
sion, and perhaps double the number of States we 
now have, should the Union last. For myself, I 
say to you, my southern colleagues on this floor, 
that I do not apprehend danger to our constitu- 
tional rights from the bare fact of increasing the 
number of States with institutions dissimilar to 
ours. The whole governmental fabric of the Uni- 
ted States is based and founded upon the idea of 
dissiniiliarity in the institutions of the respective 
members. Principles, not numbers, are our pro- 
1 tection. When these fail, we have, like all other 
' people, who, knowing their rights, dare maintain 
! them, nothing to rely upon but the justice of our 



cause, our own riglit arms and stout hearts. With 
these feelings and this basis of action, whenever 
any State comes and asks admission, as Oregon 
does, 1 am prepared to extend her the hand of 
welcome, without looking into her constitution 
further than to see that it^'is republican in form, 
upon our well-known American models. 

When agijression comes, if come it ever shall, 
then the end draweth nigh. Then, if in my day, 
I shall be for resistance, open, bold, and defiant. 
I know of no allegiance superior to that due the 
hearthstones of the homestead. This I say to all. 
I lay no claim to any sentiment of nationality not 
founded upon the patriotism of a true heart, and 
I know of no such patriotism tliatdoes not center 
at home. Like the enlarging circle upon the sur- 
face of smooth waters, however, this cati and will, 
if umrbstructed, extend to the utmost limits of a 
common country. Such is my nationality — such 
my.sectionalism— such my patriotism. Ourfathers 
of the South joined your fathers of the North [ 
in resistance to a common aggression from their | 
fatherland; and if they were justified in rising to 
right a wrong inflicted by a parent country, how 
much more ought we, should the necessity ever 
come, to stand justified before an enlightened 
world, in righting a wrong from even those we call 
brothers. Thatnecessity , I trust, will nevercorne. 
What is to be our future, I do not know. I 
have no taste for indulging in speculations about 
it. I would not, if I could, raise the vail that 
wisely conceals it from us. " Sufficient unto the 
day is the evil thereof," is a good precept in 
everything pertaining to human action. The evil 
1 wo'idd not anticipate; I would rather strive Jto 
prevent its coming; and one way, in my judg- 
ment, to prevent it, is, while here, in all things to 
do what is right and proper to be done under 
the Constitution of the United Slates; nothing, 
more, and nothing less. Our safety, as well as the 
prosperity of all parts of the country, so long as 
this Government lasts, lies mainly in a strict con- 
formity to the laws of its existence. Growth is 
one of these. The admission of new States, is one 
of the ol'jects expressly provided for. How are 
they to come in.' With just such constitutions as 
the people in each may please to make for them- 
selves, so it is republican in form. This is the 
ground the South has ever stood upon. Let us 
not abandon it now. It is founded upon a prin- 
ciple planted in the compact of Union itself; and 
mori- essential to us than all others besides; that 
is, the equality of the States, and the reserved 
rights of the people of the respective States. By 
our system, each State, however great the num- 
ber, has the absolute right to regulate all its in- 
ternal affairs as she pleases, subject only to lier 
obligations under the Constitution of the United 
Slates. With this limitation, the people of Massa- 
chusetts have the perfect right to do as they please 
upon all matters relating to their internal policy; 
the people of Ohio have the right to do the same; 
the people of Georgisf the same; of California 
the sami'; and so with all the rest. 

Such is the machinery of our theory of self- 
government by the people. This is the great nov- 
elty of our peculiar system, involving a principle 
unknown to the ancients, an idea never dreamed 
of by Aristotle or Plato. The union of several 
distinct, independent communities upon this basis, 
is a new principle in human governments. It is 



now a problem in experiment for the people of 
the nineteenth century upon this continent to solve. 
As I behold its workings in the past and at the 
present, while I am not sanguine, yet I am hope- 
ful of it.s successful solution. The most joyous 
feeling of my heart is the earnest hope that it will, 
for the future, move on as peacefully, prosper- 
ously, and brilliantly, as it has in the past. If so, 
then we shall exiiibit a moral and political spec- 
tacle to the world something like the prophetic 
vision of Ezekiel, when he saw a number of dis- 
tinct beings or living creatures, each with a sepa- 
rate and distinct organism, having the functions 
of life within itself, ail of one external likeness, 
and all, at the same time, mysteriously connected 
with one common animating spirit pervading the 
whole, so that when the common spirit moved 
they all moved; their appearance and their work 
being, as it were, a wheel in the middle of a wheel; 
and whithersoeverthecommon spirit went, thither 
the others went, all going together; and when they 
went, he heard the noise of their motion like the 
noise of great waters, as the voice of the Almighty. 
Should our experiment succeed, such will be oiir 
exhibition— a machinery of Government so intri- 
cate, so complicated, with so many separate and 
distinct parts, so many independent States, each 
perfect in the attributes and functions of sover- 
eignty, within its own jurisdiction, all, neverthe- 
less, united under the control of a common di- 
recting power for external objects and purposes, 
may natural enough seem novel, strange, and in- 
explicable to the philosophers and crowned heads 
of the world. 

It is for us, and those who shall come after us, 
to determine whether this grand experimental 
problem shall be worked out; not by quarreling 
amongst ourselves; not by doing injustice to any; 
not by keeping out any particular class of States; 
but by each State remaining a separate and dis- 
tinct political organism within itself — all bound 
together for general objects, under a common Fed- 
eral head; as it were, a wheel within a wheel. 
Then the numbermay be multiplied without limit; 
and then, indeed, may the nations of the earth 
look on in wonder at oftr career; and when they 
hear the noise of the wheels of our progress in 
achievement, in development, in expansion, in 
glory, and renown, it may well appear to them 
not unlike the noise of great waters; the very voice 
of the Almighty— Fox pojndi ! Vox Dei .' [Great 
applause in the galleries, and on the floor.] 

The SPEAKER. If the applause in the galle- 
ries is repeated, the Chair will order the galleries 
to be cleared. 

Many Members. It was upon the floor. 
Mr. 'STEPHENS, of Georgia. One or two 
other matters only I wish to allude to. These 
relate mainly to ainendments. I trust that every 
friend of this bill will unite and vote down every 
amendment. It needs no amendment. Oregon 
has nothing to do with Kansas, and should in no 
way be connected with her. To remand her back, 
as the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. M.\r- 
siiall] proposes, to compel her to regulate suf- 
frage as we may be disposed to dictate, would be 
buTgoing back to the old attempt to impose con- 
ditions upon Missouri. There is no necessity for 
any census, if we are satisfied, froin all the evi- 
dence before us, that there are sixty thousand 
inhabitants there. Florida was admitted without 



8 



a census. Texas was admitted, with two inem- 
bers on this floor, without a census. So was Cal- 
ifornia. 

To our friends upon this side of the House, let 
me say, if yon cannot vote for the bill, assist us 
in having it voted upon as it is. Put on no riders. 
Give us no side blows. Aid in keeping them off. 
Let the measure stand or fall upon its merits. If 
you cannot vote for the bill, vote against it just 
as it stands. 

I sec my time is nearly out, and I cannot go 
into the discussion of other branches of the ques- 
tion; but may I not make an appeal to all sides 
of the House to come up to do their duty to- 
day.' I have spoken of the rapid development 
of our country and its progress in all its material 
resources. Is it true that the intellectual and 
moral development of our country has not kept 
pace with its physical.' Has our political body 
outgrov/n the heads and hearts of those who are 
to govern it.' Is it so, that this Thirty-Fifth Con- 
gress is unequal to the great mission before it.' 
Are wc progressing in everything but mind and 
patriotism.' Has destiny cast upon us a heavier 
load of duty than v/e are able to perform.' Are 



we unequal to the task assigned us.' I trust not. 
I know It is sometimes said in the country that 
Congress has degenerated. It is for us this day 
to show whether it is true or not. For myself, I 
do not believe it. It may be that the esprit du corps 
may have some influence on my judgment. Some- 
thing may be pardoned to that. But still I feel 
that I address men of as much intelligence, reflec- 
tion, talent, integrity, virtue, and worth, as I have 
ever met in this Hall; men not unfit to be the 
Representatives of this great, growing, and pros- 
perous Confederacy. The only real fitness for any 
public station is to be up to the requirements of the 
occasion, whatever that be. Letus, then, vindicate 
our characters as fit legislators to-day; and, with 
that dignity and decorum which have so signally 
marked our proceedings upon other great, excit- 
ing questions before, and which, whatever may 
be said of our debates, may be claimed as a dis- 
tinguished honor for the present House of Rep- 
resentatives, let us do the work assigned us v/ith 
tiiat integrity of purpose which discharges duty 
regardless of consequences, and with a patriotism 
commensurate with the magnitude of the subject 
under all its responsibilities. 



Printed at the Congressional Globe Office. 



IN EXCHAIMME 
JWN 5 1917 



